Individual differences in people's susceptibility to heuristics and biases (HB) are often measured by multiple-bias questionnaires consisting of one or a few items for each bias. This research approach relies on the assumptions that (1) different versions of a decision bias task measure are interchangeable as they measure the same cognitive failure; and (2) that some combination of these tasks measures the same underlying construct. Based on these assumptions, in Study 1 we developed two versions of a new decision bias survey for which we modified 13 HB tasks to increase their comparability, construct validity, and the participants' motivation. The analysis of the responses (N = 1279) showed weak internal consistency within the surveys and a great level of discrepancy between the extracted patterns of the underlying factors. To explore these inconsistencies, in Study 2 we used three original examples of HB tasks for each of seven biases. We created three decision bias surveys by allocating one version of each HB task to each survey. The participants' responses (N = 527) showed a similar pattern as in Study 1, questioning the assumption that the different examples of the HB tasks are interchangeable and that they measure the same underlying construct. These results emphasize the need to understand the domain-specificity of cognitive biases as well as the effect of the wording of the cover story and the response mode on bias susceptibility before employing them in multiple-bias questionnaires.

The aim of this study was to initiate the exploration of debiasing methods applicable in real-life settings for achieving lasting improvement in decision making competence regarding multiple decision biases. Here, we tested the potentials of the analogical encoding method for decision debiasing. The advantage of this method is that it can foster the transfer from learning abstract principles to improving behavioral performance. For the purpose of the study, we devised an analogical debiasing technique for 10 biases (covariation detection, insensitivity to sample size, base rate neglect, regression to the mean, outcome bias, sunk cost fallacy, framing effect, anchoring bias, overconfidence bias, planning fallacy) and assessed the susceptibility of the participants (N = 154) to these biases before and 4 weeks after the training. We also compared the effect of the analogical training to the effect of ‘awareness training’ and a ‘no-training’ control group. Results suggested improved performance of the analogical training group only on tasks where the violations of statistical principles are measured. The interpretation of these findings require further investigation, yet it is possible that analogical training may be the most effective in the case of learning abstract concepts, such as statistical principles, which are otherwise difficult to master. The study encourages a systematic research of debiasing trainings and the development of intervention assessment methods to measure the endurance of behavior change in decision debiasing.

Over the past decade, a compelling number of studies reported that observing an action makes the imitation of that action more likely. The automatic character of human imitative behaviour was often claimed, but rarely tested. The demonstration of the absence of conscious control has been attempted in a recent report claiming that imitation can occur in the rock -paper-scissors (RPS) game, where strategic players should avoid imitating their opponents. This surprising result could serve as strong evidence that humans imitate each other unconsciously. We find, however, that this conclusion is problematic. In addition to reviewing the original methods, in this work, we also replicated the experiment with double the sample size. Thorough examination of the original analyses and the results of the present replication do not support the original conclusion. In our view, testing the theory of automatic imitation in RPS games is a potentially promising avenue of exploration, yet the interpretation of the data requires further understanding of the subsidiary effects controlling the behaviour of the players.

Since the discovery of the mirror neuron system, it has been proposed that the automatic tendency to copy observed actions exists in humans and that this mechanism might be responsible for a range of social behavior. A strong argument for automatic behavior can be made when actions are executed against motivation to do otherwise. Strategic games in which imitation is disadvantageous serve as ideal designs for studying the automatic nature of participants’ behavior. Most recently, Belot, Crawford, and Heyes (2013) conducted an explorative study using a modified version of the Rock–Paper–Scissors game, and suggested that in the case of asynchrony in the execution of the gestures, automatic imitation can be observed early on after the opponent’s presentation. In our study, we video recorded the games, which allowed us to examine the effect of delay on imitative behavior as well as the sensitivity of the previously employed analyses. The examination of the recorded images revealed that more than 80% of the data were irrelevant to the study of automatic behavior. Additional bias in the paradigm became apparent, as previously presented gestures were found to affect the behavior of the players. After noise filtering, we found no evidence of automatic imitation in either the whole filtered data set or in selected time windows based on delay length. Besides questioning the strength of the results of previous analyses, we propose several experimental and statistical modifications for further research on automatic imitation.

This study investigates prior observation of an opponent's performance as a task constraint on decision-making of basketball players. Participants will watch a 1vs1-basketball scenario under two conditions differing in the ball-carrier's trajectory. Condition A is defined by distribution of offensive moves equally to the right and left. In condition B, offensive moves will be biased to one side. Thereafter, participants will perform as defenders against the observed opponent with pseudo-random distribution of offensive moves. All trials will be video recorded and players' displacements tracked. It is expected that participants will show initially biased displacements by the previous observation, but will adjust their behaviour to the situational dynamics.

This study investigates prior observation of an opponent's performance as a task constraint on decision-making of basketball players. Participants will watch a 1vs1-basketball scenario under two conditions differing in the ball-carrier's trajectory. Condition A is defined by distribution of offensive moves equally to the right and left. In condition B, offensive moves will be biased to one side. Thereafter, participants will perform as defenders against the observed opponent with pseudo-random distribution of offensive moves. All trials will be video recorded and players' displacements tracked. It is expected that participants will show initially biased displacements by the previous observation, but will adjust their behaviour to the situational dynamics.